Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) recognises the critical role that Trade Training Centres (TTCs) play in introducing young people to vocational education at school and assisting them to achieve vocational education and training (VET) qualifications;

(2) acknowledges that TTCs have enabled schools to provide greater and more diverse opportunities for students completing secondary school;

(3) accepts the important role that TTCs play in ensuring that young people get the vocational skills they require and in conjunction, are able to achieve a secondary school certificate that otherwise may not have been possible;

(4) supports the industry partnerships between registered training organisations, schools and VET providers that have prospered through the introduction of TTCs;

(5) condemns the Government’s $950 million cut to the TTC program; and

(6) urges the Government to honour its commitment to support existing TTCs.

I rise today on this incredibly important motion looking at the critical role that trade training centres play in our school communities. I have had the privilege of visiting a number recently during the break from sittings and have been able to see firsthand just how important these trade training centres are in terms of the opportunities they are giving to young people in our high schools.

I visited Doonside Technical High School, where I was able to see young people working on industry standard machinery and getting vocational education and training skills. I heard from the teachers and from all the young people involved in this training about the jobs it was resulting in. I visited a number of other places where I have seen the good work that has been done as a result of the Trade Training Centre program that Labor put in place. This is providing great vocational education for young people in our schools. It is embedded in our curriculum to ensure that young people who have aptitude for hands-on skills are getting to learn them at school. There are also many who are achieving a VET qualification and going on to TAFE or into a job. I think it is incredibly important to recognise that.

Unfortunately, though, not all schools are going to benefit from the Trade Training Centre program. Despite Tony Abbott saying before the election that there would be no cuts to education—one of the many promises he made—$950 million has been cut from the Trade Training Centre program. Many schools that were planning to apply, that have been working hard to look at what their students and their communities need, have now lost the opportunity to apply for those funds. I have spoken to a number of school principals who are incredibly upset because they had a plan, they had an idea, and now they will not get those funds. In some of the places I visited in Tasmania, there was frustration that the school down the road had the opportunity to get those funds but the school in the next suburb would not have that opportunity.

We have heard often from those opposite about how much they appreciate the trade training centres in their local communities. I hope that members opposite who speak today will reinforce that. I hope the member for Forde will back the nine schools in his electorate that missed out on the opportunity for trade training centres. I hope the member for Mitchell will back the 16 schools in his electorate that will never get the opportunity under the Abbott government to apply for a trade training centre. I hope the member for Herbert will back his 11 schools that will no longer get the opportunity to apply for a trade training centre. And I hope the member for Banks will back the 10 schools in his electorate and argue for them to get the trade training centres they deserve. We will see whether government members will have the guts to stand up for their schools, knowing the great work that has been done at the schools that have been able to get trade training centres. If they do not, then I hope they will stand up in their communities and say to the schools that have never had the opportunity to apply for these trades training centres: 'I agree with the Prime Minister that you should never have the opportunity to apply for these trade training centres.'

The numbers are quite significant. In Western Australia there are 173 schools that will never get the opportunity; New South Wales, 496 schools; South Australia, 83 schools; Victoria, 354 schools; and Queensland, 292 schools. That is very disappointing when you see what great work has been done. So it is time for the government to reconsider this policy. They need to not only reconsider their broken promise of no cuts to education—$950 million is a big cut—but look at the future of our young people. We are seeing unemployment figures rising under their watch. It is time for them to stop cutting programs and funds that were actually making a difference, that were connecting young people with skills and, importantly, ensuring there was a connection with industry as well. So it is time for those on the opposite side, those on the backbench, to stand up for their local communities and demand that the Prime Minister reverse this nasty cut.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is another contribution that is heavy on style but of little substance. It is worth reflecting on Labor's record on trade training centres over the last six or seven years. There was neglect, under-delivery, over-promising and a whole range of issues that this government now has to clean up. Let's go through a list. In 2007 the former Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, said Labor would build trade training centres in every one of Australia's 2,650 secondary schools at a cost of $2.5 billion. Yet only 304 centres were in operation when the government changed in September 2013. Those opposite, when they were in government, could never have delivered a trade training centre in every secondary school in Australia.

I thank the member for Kingston for bringing this motion to the House because it allows us to properly reflect on what this government is doing in the vocational education and training sector. Those opposite, when they were in government, never provided the funding to provide all of those 2650-odd training centres. Much like many other things that the previous government did not do, an Australian National Audit Office report found in 2011 that the program was riddled with delays. For example, it took 240 days between a school receiving an in-principle agreement to build a trade training centre and a contract being signed. Furthermore, documents obtained by the coalition through FOI show that Labor's trade training centres were a spectacular failure: program evaluators could not tell who had received training; trade training centres failed to address skills shortages; trade training centres were skewed towards providing low-level qualifications; and more than half of the trade training centre students failed to find a job and only 20 per cent of job seekers found work in an area relevant to their training. In addition, industry raised many concerns about inconsistencies in the quality of training, qualifications and equipment offered from one trade training centre to the next, along with feedback that students do not graduate with the skills employers need.

Let us contrast that with what we are seeking to do in government, and I agree with member for Kingston: we should look to provide support to those students at school who do not want to follow a tertiary path. In fact, I think it is important to reflect that we do need to lift the communities view of the importance and quality of a trade. Some 50 per cent of Australia's millionaires today started off as tradespeople, so trade is an enormous benefit and qualification.

But there is another reason we need to focus on trades and building our skills capacity: the average age of a tradesman today is 51. Many of those people are going to retire in the next 10, 15 or 20 years and we are going to have a tremendous skill shortage. So it is entirely consistent with our government's view that we need a first-rate VET in school system that is valued as equally as a university pathway is valued. We need to elevate the status of trades and training, because we believe apprenticeships and traineeships must be seen as a first-class education and career choice for young Australians. It should never be considered a second-best option. That is why the coalition government are so focused on ensuring that we are strengthening vocational education and training in schools, and we see it as a vital component to our plan for a stronger Australia.

Look at the success of a body like the Australian Industry Trade College—and we are discussing putting in a new campus at Beenleigh in my electorate of Forde. Ninety seven per cent of the students that go through that school graduate with a job and the qualifications to work in the industry that they have been working in for the past two years. That is the model. That is the solution, and that is what this government is seeking to achieve for the students in Australia.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

An extraordinary contribution by the member for Forde. He tells us: 'Trade training in schools and vocational education in schools is really important, and so we have cut the funding. We have taken $950 million out of the forward estimates because we believe this is so important, and we might be thinking of building one facility in one campus somewhere in South Australia.' What an extraordinary nonsense.

We all understand, and I think it is widely accepted across both sides of the chamber, that we do need to re-engage with that trades culture, and certainly this has been the language of federal government for quite some time. We do need to redevelop and restrengthen that culture of the trades, and that is precisely why the Labor government put in place this funded program to develop state-of-the-art facilities in schools. I have to say that in Western Australia we have 37 of these facilities that have been built in the past five years. I think that is actually a very good outcome and a very good rate of progress. And of course it does not just apply to the 37 schools on which those facilities are built. For example, at Morley Senior High School, which has now got a fantastic automotive centre, there are students that come from five different schools to do their trade training and their pre-apprenticeship programs. At John Forrest Secondary College in our electorate, where the school has set up their trade training centre in conjunction with the Master Plumbers and Gasfitters Association of WA, they have students coming from 22 schools to do their trade training and pre-apprenticeship program.

It is incredibly vital that we have a systematic approach, not just a bit of random pork-barrelling—to the member for Forde—but that we have a concerted program. I look at the places across Western Australia that have got them, and students come from the north of the state and from right down as far away as Denmark in the southern part of the state. They are spread evenly throughout the state and they have been a great boon. It is really important that the kids who are now staying at school until they are 17 are introduced in year 10, at the very least, to a variety of trades. They get a taste of a variety of different trades, and then, over their years 11 and 12, develop a real understanding. It makes them more effective for employers. Employers are obviously going to benefit if they get kids with three years of real exposure to those trade skills before they enter their apprenticeships. They are going to be a much more effective product. They are going to know that this is the trade that they want to do, and they are going to be more effective for their employer.

We know there are special skills in dealing with adolescents and in training adolescent students. The attrition rate in the TAFE-developed products is far greater than it is in these school-based projects. They provide a more supported environment that 15-, 16- and 17-year-olds need in order to stay focused and embrace this training. I think this has been an incredibly successful program, and it is one that, if we have any belief that we need to have proper vocational education and trade training in our schools, we must commit to.

There has been no alternative proposal put in place by the federal government. Under the Howard government, we had the proposal where we had these UFOs that were just randomly located across a few places. That was not a comprehensive program. We have to work with our high schools to deliver vocational education in a proper and systematic way, and all of the evidence that I have seen to date tells me that these trade training centres in Western Australia have been an absolute success.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kingston for the opportunity to speak on this matter because this is another example of Labor's failure in government, when they attempted to do too much, too quickly in a way that was not well considered or planned out. When you look at the whole federal government's record over a long period of time, this was a very ideological moment when it came to office. The Gillard government wanted to wipe Howard government technical colleges even though they were very successful, and they were successful because they partnered with industry.

It was not just as the member for Kingston said: 'also' you have got to talk about industry. Industry was at the front and centre of the Australian Technical Colleges because it was about getting young people jobs—getting young people work. There is no point giving people skills if they cannot get work. There is no point giving people skills if they cannot find work in the field they are looking in. Of course, we know half have failed to find work under this model. We know that only 20 per cent have achieved work in their relevant field.

Those stats are damning. They are damning because this was an overambitious program—yet another one from the Gillard-Rudd government—which has not achieved what it was supposed to achieve. That is because they tried to put a technical college into 2,650 schools. How many were achieved? Only 260, and 250 underway, when we took office. Of course, it was massive, epic failure because government tried to do too much. Industry tells us that if you do not concentrate skills and work in partnership with the sectors you will not achieve work for these young people, and that is exactly what is happening. So the government is perfectly within its rights to say what is working and, more importantly, what is not working—what is failing young people.

Ms Rishworth interjecting—

It is not just a question of spending money, money that you do not earn, money that you do not have, member for Kingston, money that you are borrowing off foreigners—money that you are borrowing and paying interest on in our future. You are mortgaging our future. That is the money you are borrowing. You do not have the money, and if you do not have it you need to spend it very wisely. If you look at the technical colleges, they were so successful because they partnered with people like the master builders, the master plumbers, the master painters, the National Electrical and Communications Association, restaurants and catering.

Ms Rishworth interjecting—

If you speak to industry, if you get out into the real world, member for Kingston, and speak to industry, they will tell you the technical college model worked precisely because of that partnership. It took kids from disadvantaged backgrounds, it gave them the skills, it partnered them with the work, and they got the jobs. There was one just down the road from me in the electorate of Greenway at Blacktown, the Anglican Technical College. If you spoke to the master plumbers there—which I do not imagine the member for Kingston has because she has not been out consulting with the industry—and if you consult with the industry they will tell you there is no point. Kids were getting certificate IIIs in bricklaying but they could not lay a brick. That is what they will tell you. Those poor young people could not go back into the training system because they have already had their certificate III. They were qualified. They could not get a job because they did not do the work. That is what the master builders will tell you.

Ms Rishworth interjecting—

That is what they will tell you, member for Kingston. You can laugh all you want. But it is not your money you are throwing down the drain. It is not your young people that you are seeing that cannot get a job. That is the reality of this failed program. The government needs to now make the best of a bad situation. It does not even make a lot of sense that you can put a school system that is not geared at skills and work—this technical skills and technical knowledge—into a higher education system.

Two thousand six hundred and fifty is too ambitious. You are never going to achieve it, and that was the reality of what happened. There was no money attached. There was no funding on an ongoing basis. Of course, let's establish 2,650. They thought the press release was the work. This was the Gillard government at work. You issue a press release and that is the job done. You have accomplished 2,650 new technical colleges—in every school in the country—because it is written down on a piece of paper released from the Prime Minister's office. The reality is there was no money attached to fund these trade training centres. There was no money attached on an initial basis because only a few hundred were established and there was no ongoing funding.

It makes more sense to concentrate what you are doing. It makes more sense to have technical colleges where there is expertise concentrated, and you cannot do every single school in the country. No government ever will. You will never have a government that does it, and we will not be able to achieve it either. You need to concentrate the skills, spend the money wisely and make sure you are 100 per cent focused on working with industry to get young people jobs. That should be at the centre of the policy, not an adjunct, not something you say in the last second of your speech: and we are going to work with industry. Industry is what it is all about. Getting people jobs is what it is all about. There is no point having the skills if you cannot get a job, and this government is going to make sure this money is well spent and we get those young people jobs.

Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That kind of professional spin—the lecture from the previous speaker about getting out in the real world—from people who have only worked in electoral offices, whether it is for David Clarke MLC or the member for Parramatta, is the kind of politics that was rejected at the weekend in Victoria. The real world was branch stacking for the Liberal Party with David Clarke for a number of years. He says that the situation here is too ambitious, it is too costly et cetera. So their solution to an ambitious program is to totally abolish it and do nothing, and we have got a situation here where a program of $2.5 billion up till 2018 has been abandoned and $950 million has been slashed from it, coincidentally in the same week that they destroyed the South Australian automobile industry.

They say that we can get some statistics that indicate a significant number of people who have gone through trade training colleges did not receive employment in the sector that they tried to go into. That kind of statistic, that people seek in life to go down a particular road and the availability of jobs in that particular occupation is not there, can be produced about virtually every program and scheme. But let's not run away from the crucial factor as to why people might not be getting employment. If John Howard is emulated by the current Prime Minister in many fashions, it has not been too successful. But in regards to unemployment, the current Prime Minister has been very successful because he has lifted youth unemployment to around 14 per cent—figures not seen for quite some time.

If you look at these suburbs in my electorate such as Claymore, Minto, Casula and Ingleburn, they are quite distant from the CBD. They are lacking in cross-city transport. They would have higher unemployment, both general and youth unemployment, than the rest of Sydney. Rather than an outcome such as Mount Carmel in my electorate, where the former minister before the elections went out there and opened a facility which is in the catering sector with new kitchens which has employment dealings with the Campbelltown Catholic Club which has a career path for people who do not want to go to university, rather than have the celebration by the student body, the teachers and the parents about that future, what they have decided is to scrap the whole scheme. A significant number of schools in my electorate such as Casula High School, Lurnea, Robert Townson, Sarah Redfern, Sule College et cetera, which are in areas of high unemployment, worsened by the current government's performance, will not have that future.

This is part of a broader pattern, of course. We recently had the NATSEM figures produced with regard to overall budget changes in this country. I would remind you that the current Prime Minister has said that NATSEM is highly reliable. It is credible; it can be believed. NATSEM made the point that the Werriwa electorate, where we are talking about scrapping these trade training schemes, had a 0.859 correlation with regard to how the budget was negatively affecting the electorate. I would remind you that there are only seven electorates out of 150 in the whole country with ratings over 0.7, and we are at 0.859, the third worst in the country.

We have a situation where the overall budget hurts my electorate. We have a situation where they have changed the rules on Newstart and other schemes for young unemployed people. We have a situation where Youth Connections has been abolished—partnership brokers are basically out the door—and the national careers advisory committee has also been scrapped. This meant the abolition of a scheme that they said was too ambitious, which was trying too hard. They were saying that, basically, it was not going to be accomplished. Their policy is to force unemployed young people onto no payments for six-month periods to make it more difficult for people in my electorate to get to university. They are giving a free-for-all to the private sector for universities to increase the fees to levels not heretofore seen, in a way which will undermine regional universities such as the University of Western Sydney.

Before the last election 510 announcements had been made, where half the schools were already operating and the others were in either the design or the construction phase. So this is a scheme that should not have been condemned. It should not have been put on the altar of 'budgetary reform', as they put it. In this situation, people in my electorate are going to be denied options to complete these courses in high school to give themselves a future career. I condemn very strongly the measures of the government.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'By 1990 no Australian child will be will live in poverty.' 'Climate change is the greatest moral challenge of our time.' 'Every child in an Australian school will receive a computer.' 'We are going to build 2,650 trades training centres in every high school in the country.' Labor love an announcement, but they were unable to follow through. Australian children in 1990 were still living in poverty. Labor walked away from climate change. My kids are still waiting for their computer. And they built 250 trades training centres.

The member for Kingston and I are both on the House Standing Committee on Education and Employment. We have both been through the TAFE inquiry. We both understand the challenges in relation to VET. We both understand the challenges about the efficient use of resources—that TAFE and VET, especially trades training centres, are very capital intensive in the way we use these things. We must make sure that those resources are being used efficiently. So, when we are rolling these things out, we must make sure that they are not locked up for 10 weeks over Christmas and that they are not locked up for two weeks here, two weeks there and another week here. These things have to be used day and night.

The trades training centre model, as far as I was concerned, and every time I look at it, was flawed. What did work were the Australian technical colleges. They were tied up as separate organisations where kids could finish off years 11 and 12 and come out ahead on their apprenticeships. What I hated most about when Labor came to power was not only that they took out the practical challenge of delivering 2,650 trades training centres and did not deliver on any of them but also that they went out of their way to philosophically destroy what John Howard had put in place with these technical colleges. The Australian technical college at Townsville was one of the fantastic ones and is still operating today, but what Labor did—what Kevin Rudd did—was to make them spend $50,000 changing their logo, their name, all their letterheads and everything, and then to pull all funding from them, leaving them stranded. That to me, more than anything to do with the promise of 2,650 and the delivery of 250, was the sin here. That is the mortal sin.

What we must do as a country is make the most of our resources. What we must do is to make sure that TAFE, VET and schools training centres are delivering what we need to do. If you are going to spend a lot of money and work really hard in this area then you have to make sure that those resources are being used to their maximum, and they are not.

We had the member for Perth in here recently speaking on this motion. We were over in Perth talking about vocational education and training, and TAFE in particular. She got the people from the trades training centre to come in. The thing does not work. The model does not work. They spent an awful lot of money on this thing, and it does not deliver the results. We have kids coming through these things who are being passed through without having to be responsible for what they are actually trying to do here. We have kids getting through these things, and they are turning up at jobs without any skills whatsoever. That is the problem we have here, and that is what you cannot walk away from. The Australian technical college model, where they go in and actually sign up for an apprenticeship with an employer, get their higher school certificate and get delivered through the thing, is the model which actually works. So what we have to do—

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For a hundred students!

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Gee, I could have sworn you had your go on this one. Maybe you should move for extra time. Whilst we are at it, the member for Werriwa was having a go at the member for Mitchell. No-one could accuse the member for Werriwa of trying too hard. He said to the member for Mitchell that he has just been involved in politics. How long has Laurie been involved? How long has the member for Werriwa actually been involved in the game, in the New South Wales Legislative Assembly and here? For about 30 years. So please do not stand over there and lecture us on what we have to do here. That is just a little bit rich.

So it is about the efficient use of resources and it is about delivering those things.

Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting—

He would never branch-stack! He cannot get anyone to sign up for him, mate! He has to have central command come with him just to protect him. That is what has to happen in this space. Everybody else can get people to sign up for membership because they like us or they like what we want to do. Poor old Laurie, the member for Werriwa, is sitting over there saying, 'Someone please protect me.'

So what we have to do is make sure that we get efficient use of resources. As for the trades training centre model, Labor did not even believe in it themselves; otherwise they would have delivered more. (Time expired)

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am enjoying the robust debate. The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kingston for bringing this matter forward. It is a critical matter and I know many of those opposite have made light of it, but, in a period of rising unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, I would have thought that trade training centres should have pre-eminence in discussion in this parliament. I find it very interesting that those opposite want to try to belittle this project and tell us all of its shortcomings. For those of us who have been in this parliament for more than one term, let me tell you that the line-up of those opposite when there was a photo opportunity at the opening of another trade training centre in their electorates was just astounding. It was like playing Where's Wally?—you had these people just popping up. They wanted to be part of the action. As a matter of fact, in the last term of government, so many people from the Liberal and National side lobbied so heavily on behalf of their schools and local business communities that it was extraordinary. A lot of trade training centres were opened in their electorates. Now they want to stand here and say that they do not work. They say that because they are part of a government that has cut up to $40 billion from health and education. In vocational education—training and skills education—they have taken $2 billion out of the system, including the $950 million out of trade training centres.

I do not know about those opposite, but I am very proud of the electorate I represent. I represent the most multicultural electorate in the whole of Australia, bar none. The diversity and vibrancy are something to be proud of, but one of the things I am not so proud of is the fact that we have high unemployment, including high youth unemployment. For my part, I will go out every day and lobby to see if we can do something about providing for vocational education and training, to help young people transition from school into employment. I notice there are a lot of young people in the gallery today. I would like to think that we can stand here, look these young people in the eye and say, 'We are going to give you a future,' not simply argue about dollars and cents and why you want to cut the program.

Bear in mind, we were not the party who came to this parliament, saying, 'We will not cut education.'

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We want to create an economy that gets them a job.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those sitting opposite—Tony, you are one of them—are part of a regime that said, 'No cuts to education.' As soon as you got on the government benches, what did you do? You cut education; you cut health; you have consistently cut into young people's futures.

This is one of the astounding things about trade training centres. Sure, I agree: it was a Labor initiative—and we are proud of it. As I said earlier, there was not an occasion when those Liberals and Nationals opposite did not flock to a photo opportunity when we were opening a new trade training centre in a local school in their electorates. These trade training centres were the product of a partnership—certainly a partnership of government but also a partnership of local businesses and schools. They did not work without that partnership. The process started with an assessment of local employment opportunities and the needs that had to be met in local communities. What you are turning your back on is that partnership.

You are punishing young unemployed people in areas like mine that have a high unemployment rate. While you are punishing them by knocking off these types of opportunities, you are trying to forcefully remove young people, under 25-year-olds, from Newstart. You want to take them off the dole and put them onto a youth allowance. For young unemployed people, that is $2,500 a year that they will be worse off under your regime. Do not come here and protest that this is all about delivering efficient service. These services have been in place and your side has been lobbying to make sure that they were established in schools in conservative-held electorates, and they have been established in Liberal and National party electorates. They are a government with no vision. They went to the election, they said one thing and, after the election, they did the exact opposite.

This is about honouring a partnership for the benefit of young people, giving them a choice, helping them become more job ready and helping them to transition from school into gainful employment. This is an investment in our future. What they are proposing here is absolutely bad policy. It is bad for young people; it is bad for their future outlook. This is bad policy because it does not put the interests of our nation first. We need to make sure that we have young people job ready in a way that we can participate in a constructive— (Time expired)

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor's record in this area is particularly bad. We need to go back to 2007 and that era of the former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd walking around carrying laptops and talking about working families and so on. What he said then was that 2,650 trade training centres would be opened across the nation, one in every high school. In order for the program to work, three things need to happen. Firstly, the program needs to be funded, secondly, the centres need to open and, thirdly, they need to teach people in an effective manner.

There were problems in all areas because the first thing that happened was that the total number actually built over six years was 11 per cent of the high schools in Australia. So about 300 of the 2,650 trade training centres were built over six years—11 per cent of what was promised in 2007. The next problem was that the first 250 of these centres cost $1.1 billion. The entire program, covering 2,650 schools, was supposed to cost $2.5 billion. The first 250, less than 10 per cent of the total proposed, cost $1.1 billion, and that suggests that the other 2,300 or so remaining would cost a whole lot more than $1.4 billion were they in fact ever to be built, which, of course, they were not. The other big problem was that the academic results of these centres were mediocre to say the least. We have a situation where, according to documents obtained under freedom of information, only 20 per cent of people who attended one of these trade training centres actually obtained a job in the area for which they trained. Only 20 per cent of people actually got a job in the area that they were supposedly trained in.

What does an incoming government do? Does an incoming government continue with a flawed project or does an incoming government say, 'Let's make a more constructive contribution to the very important area of trades training'?

That is by working with industry, recalibrating the program to make sure it is focused on the needs of industry so that people get jobs at the end of it. It is very hard for those opposite to sit there and argue that a program is a success when it led to 20 per cent of people trained in a particular area getting a job. That is a very low threshold for success.

The Labor Party has a low threshold for success in many areas. This is only one of them. It is another example of appalling budget management. I do note that those opposite made some appalling statements about what they would deliver in budget management and they failed, time and time again. The member for Kingston, who so helpfully raised this motion today, was an enthusiastic advocate of the previous government's policies on budgetary matters.

In May 2010 the member for Kingston put out a press release. It said: 'This budget builds on that strength to deliver for the people in our community while getting the budget back to surplus three years early—which is in the extraordinary achievement.' If it had happened it would have been an achievement of some kind, but it obviously did not happen. She pressed on with this theme. In May 2011, in an appearance on the ABC—we have been very exhaustive in our research here—she said:

What we’ve also said is that we are committed, as the economy grows, we will return the budget to surplus in 2012-13. That’s what we’ve committed to do. … That’s why Penny Wong, Wayne Swan and a whole range of ministers including the Prime Minister have been working very hard on this, but we will commit to getting the budget to surplus in 2012-13.

In May 2012 she said it was an incredibly responsible budget. She said:

This budget puts us on track for a $1.5 billion surplus in 2012-13. We are returning the budget to surplus, as I said, on time and as promised … We are doing it ahead of every single advanced major economy. I think this is very, very important …

What is important is getting things done for the Australian people. In this area of trades training, as in so many others, we are cleaning up the problems that were left behind. (Time expired)

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Banks, there is a problem with your time machine. You need to crank it back a little bit further. It is not good enough to just go to '07 and look at what happened there. The genesis of the trade training centres was to clean up the mess left by the Howard government when, as part of this broader strategy dealing with federation, it refused to properly fund key areas where agreements were held with the states and territories.

One of them was education and, within education, vocational training. We had the Howard government hell-bent on reproducing the TAFE system. They refused to properly fund it. They created a separate stream, the ATC stream, that would have set up individual TAFEs to rival TAFE. It is because the Howard government did not want to fund the states and territories.

In that circumstance that we saw the failure of that system and decided to scoop those ATCs up and bring them within schools and provide trades. In my part of Western Sydney, where manufacturing—particularly for the Chifley electorate—generates 10,000 jobs, you know very quickly that the priority is to develop people with trade skills, and the best way to do it is within schools.

What you are seeing now is a movement within schools to bring together universities and vocational training within schools much earlier on, to make the transition smoother. In our area, where we have a high demand for manufacturing and trade skills, you would argue that anything that helped strengthen the availability of quality tradespeople would be something welcomed by all and not turned into a football by some. It was incredibly stupid for the coalition government to make a decision that would rip the heart out of the trade-training centres program—nearly $1 billion stripped out by Treasurer Hockey. That would have funded 650 trade-training centres in schools through 2018. It is an absolute travesty, because the trade-training centres in our area are chalking up impressive results.

Let us talk about Loyola Senior High at Mount Druitt. Its Trade Training Centre director, Tammy Prestage, proudly boasts that the trade-training program at the school level has a 97 per cent success rate with students undertaking courses. That is 97 per cent against a national failure rate of around 50 per cent for first-year apprentices outside the school system. That is remarkable. Loyala began with seven courses in 2010-11. So successful has been that it has now expanded to 13 courses, attracting 200 students for next year. Their program includes child care, beauty and hospitality; importantly, it is integrated with local industry that advises on the skills required.

They have had many success stories. These include Darryl Martinez, who last year won the Prime Minister's Award for Electrotechnology. Congratulations to Darryl. It also includes Alexandra Vassallo, who took out the Western Sydney category in the School Based Apprentice of the Year awards. There are similar success stories from other schools in the area. For example, at Evans High and Doonside Technology High the shadow assistant minister visited, which I was very happy about, and was able to walk through and see the work there. Some of the students were so keen that they were there in the trade training centre in their lunch break, building up their skills and working on projects. They were very excited about their own futures.

These young students want a trade. The corporate sector is not on their radar. They see that they can provide great benefit by applying their skills, energy and enthusiasm through trades training. The longer-term goal should be to encourage more of those students in there. One of the tragedies of the Hockey budget is that it stopped the evolution of these centres. Ideally, it would have been used to identify and help in other skills-shortage areas. For example, in the ICT sector there are massive skill shortages. We could have seen trade-training centres move into that space, but now that has been cruelly denied.

Trade training in schools works. It removes distraction, provides greater focus and ensures that in Western Sydney we get the skills we need. What we have now is high youth unemployment, funding cuts to various programs and being set back even further because of the trade-training centre scheme being gutted by the Abbott-Hockey government.

Debate adjourned.